Wasn't the original Hexen a launch or near launch game for the N64? I remember renting it while I was just so starved for something to play other than Golden Eye.
Hmm so, I have Dark Souls 1, and I enjoyed the 15 hours or so I put into it before I gave up. I see 2 and 3 are both on sale, but I can only snag one. Which is the better one gameplay wise? I see a ton of stuff online say 2 is the light (no pun intended) But 3 is the newest one and I've heard a lot of good things?
"What plays better" between Souls 2 and 3 is so polarizing that it's difficult to advise on, generally 3 is more frenetic with significantly less emphasis on heavy armour and big shields than 2 and 1
Dark Souls 2 plays more like Dark Souls 1. Slow and steady, figuring out how to approach enemies and working your way through them. It's also my favorite game in the series.
Dark Souls 3 is a hybrid of Dark Souls and Bloodborne. All the enemies are fast and aggressive while your character is still slow and deliberate, which makes it probably the most difficult game out of all of them. Also the story is just Dark Souls 1 again.
If you want something different in a good way, go Dark Souls 2.
Highly recommend you don't go for Scholar of the First Sin as your first DS2 experience, it's a remix designed to fuck your face
Considering the DLC areas are some of the best content in the game I can only recommend the opposite. There's really just one zone that is noticeably harder than the original version, everything else is simply different. There may be some optional areas too difficult for a new character but that's not really a big deal, just come back later.
If you're picking between them and price isn't a big factor, I'd probably recommend 3 over 2 just as a game to play.
To expand slightly: I found Dark Souls 3 both more fun and more aesthetically pleasing than Dark Souls 2, so that's pretty much the whole of my recommendation.
...Also the bosses are way better in 3 than 2, especially in terms of how cool they are
dark souls 2 and 3 are notably different from 1 in that it's not just about one on one duels with enemies, but instead about learning to fight not locked on and managing multiple opponents, and being aggressive and not always relying on a shield (although it's still valid to do so)
2 was very good step in the right direction, but 3 is really where they got a lot of things right
Highly recommend you don't go for Scholar of the First Sin as your first DS2 experience, it's a remix designed to fuck your face
Considering the DLC areas are some of the best content in the game I can only recommend the opposite. There's really just one zone that is noticeably harder than the original version, everything else is simply different. There may be some optional areas too difficult for a new character but that's not really a big deal, just come back later.
I am tempted to get First Sin since its the graphically overhauled version. Both are only $11.99 and come with the base game and all the DLC. The Dark Souls 1 version I played was the Prepare to Die Edition which I have been told was similarly slightly harder
Singularity is a fun one by Raven. You have time powers and can turn Russians into old dead dudes.
Yes! Super fun, linear shooter with light, time power puzzles and satisfying weapons. Also you upgrade the sniper rifle to steerable bullets with the camera riding right behind the bullet which is amazing. (There is one short awful sewer level that must be endured before you go back to killing commies.) This one doesn't always go on sale, so $7.50 right now is a good pickup.
Call of Juarez Gunslinger is dope. Fun storytelling device, fun to play, doesn't overstay it's welcome.
Also yes! CoJ; Gunslinger is just a fantastic, contained experience. A great shooter with a good story (and compelling narrator) and some light level ups/skill choosing. And it doesn't overstay its welcome at around 7-8 hours. (Again, there is one unfortunate level in a graveyard, but otherwise it's one fun set piece after another.)
Man, what really sucks about this sale's card meta thing is that the background images you unlock are all very dark and shadow-y, not the kind of sparkly, bubbly summer fun I associate with the event. Blegh
Are they remaking D2 in hd and do I really need to buy it again
the amount of mods and even if you wanna play vanilla plugy makes it dope as heck
I just checked my saves and I've got a 68 sorc to go through hell and a bunch of other gimmicks I can test but quickly swap out thanks to plugy + 1.13, also a WHOLE world of retrofit mods I have not tried
I love diablo 2 everyone, I'm glad a lot of people like 3 but I don't know what it is 2 is magical to me
WHAT A SURPRISE RIGHT?
yeah same
there's something that 2 has that makes it magical that 3 lacks
I think my main issue with 3 is that it's so transparently a number salad, and it exponentially raises those numbers so quickly and so often that they have no meaning. You become numb to the whole affair almost immediately. I'm pretty sure there were parts of that game where I found one weapon upgrade, my damage quintupled, and then I killed an act boss in four seconds before his intro script even finished.
Switch: SW-2431-2728-9604 || 3DS: 0817-4948-1650
0
Options
Shortytouching the meatIntergalactic Cool CourtRegistered Userregular
I liked diablo 3 a lot more than 2
it was extremely smart of them to give your characters the ability to do cool shit without always needing mana potions
+13
Options
mosssnackYeah right, man, Bishop should go!Good idea!Registered Userregular
3 certainly turned into a game I liked more than 2. Right when they took away the RMAH, 3 just kept getting better and better.
That's not to take anything away from 2, though. I've reinstalled that damn game more times than I'd care to admit over the years. And time played is probably second to the time I spent playing Everquest.
dark souls 2 and 3 are notably different from 1 in that it's not just about one on one duels with enemies, but instead about learning to fight not locked on and managing multiple opponents, and being aggressive and not always relying on a shield (although it's still valid to do so)
2 was very good step in the right direction, but 3 is really where they got a lot of things right
1 forced you into group fights pretty often as well
dark souls 2 and 3 are notably different from 1 in that it's not just about one on one duels with enemies, but instead about learning to fight not locked on and managing multiple opponents, and being aggressive and not always relying on a shield (although it's still valid to do so)
2 was very good step in the right direction, but 3 is really where they got a lot of things right
1 forced you into group fights pretty often as well
Highly recommend you don't go for Scholar of the First Sin as your first DS2 experience, it's a remix designed to fuck your face
Considering the DLC areas are some of the best content in the game I can only recommend the opposite. There's really just one zone that is noticeably harder than the original version, everything else is simply different. There may be some optional areas too difficult for a new character but that's not really a big deal, just come back later.
I am tempted to get First Sin since its the graphically overhauled version. Both are only $11.99 and come with the base game and all the DLC. The Dark Souls 1 version I played was the Prepare to Die Edition which I have been told was similarly slightly harder
SotFS is much improved over base DS2 in my opinion, you're not missing anything by not playing the original.
0
Options
PiptheFairFrequently not in boats.Registered Userregular
removing the rmah caused blizzard to homogenize the shit out of builds and did some pretty serious damage to the design philosophy
the shift to focusing exclusively on sets being the only meaningful progression made every character samey as shit and stifled any sort of unique builds
D3 had a lot of problems at release and people like to pin it all on the rmah, but that was a symptom of design philosophy rather than the cause of it
and honestly, after they removed the rmah it really started blizzards increasing design philosophy across all their games of "fuck you you will play the game how we decide and also RNG is super fun"
it was extremely smart of them to give your characters the ability to do cool shit without always needing mana potions
D3 nailed combat flow and abilities/synergies way better than 2, but 3's item system has never been perfect and at worst, a complete debacle. Its progression curve is its greatest weakness
Man, what really sucks about this sale's card meta thing is that the background images you unlock are all very dark and shadow-y, not the kind of sparkly, bubbly summer fun I associate with the event. Blegh
It's supposed to contrast with the shiny-happy sticker book you're making. The park with the people jogging is turned into a parking lot. The beach boardwalk is turned into a sand-covered wasteland.
I think it was a nice touch.
(Of course, I'd rather have a wallpaper of the sticker book art than the card art.)
Hmm so, I have Dark Souls 1, and I enjoyed the 15 hours or so I put into it before I gave up. I see 2 and 3 are both on sale, but I can only snag one. Which is the better one gameplay wise? I see a ton of stuff online say 2 is the light (no pun intended) But 3 is the newest one and I've heard a lot of good things?
they are very different games
If you found Dark Souls 1 frustrating, DS2 is pretty much more of the same but deeper.
DS3 is distinct from DS1 and 2 in a variety of subtle ways that may appeal to you
removing the rmah caused blizzard to homogenize the shit out of builds and did some pretty serious damage to the design philosophy
the shift to focusing exclusively on sets being the only meaningful progression made every character samey as shit and stifled any sort of unique builds
D3 had a lot of problems at release and people like to pin it all on the rmah, but that was a symptom of design philosophy rather than the cause of it
and honestly, after they removed the rmah it really started blizzards increasing design philosophy across all their games of "fuck you you will play the game how we decide and also RNG is super fun"
How exactly does removing the rmah necessitate/cause the homogenization of the builds (which I agree, is a bit stale)? I don't see the connection.
I will say that killing the RMAH meant that I'd never play it, because some day I figured I'd pick it up, play around a bit and then spend money on the best gear to try that out. My time is worth more than my money in that context.
0
Options
KwoaruConfident SmirkFlawless Golden PecsRegistered Userregular
Diablo 3 is good and I think the biggest part of that was unfucking the drop system which makes it more impressive that the system for getting legendary items in the new wow expansion sounds like it is basically vanilla D3
D3 build variety seems pretty good to me though? Depending on sets isn't a huge deal now that set and legendary items are a thing people can actually get
I'd like to see new sets and legendary options that opened up even more builds for sure but every class has multiple builds that are able to handle everything but extreme high level greater rifts
Though I also wanted them to make it so witch doctors could actually control their pets and then blizzard decided that controllable (ie useful) pets was suddenly core to the class identity of the necromancer in order to justify putting it in and that dream died
Posts
I do have a sensor bar running to my WiiU yeah.
I'll try moving stuff around, see what happened. It only started doing that after I adjusted some cables last night.
Which is odd.
Neither is the Hexen II expansion.
If I had to wager a guess, I'd say they're in publishing rights limbo between Bethesda and Activision.
Dark Souls 3 is a hybrid of Dark Souls and Bloodborne. All the enemies are fast and aggressive while your character is still slow and deliberate, which makes it probably the most difficult game out of all of them. Also the story is just Dark Souls 1 again.
If you want something different in a good way, go Dark Souls 2.
Considering the DLC areas are some of the best content in the game I can only recommend the opposite. There's really just one zone that is noticeably harder than the original version, everything else is simply different. There may be some optional areas too difficult for a new character but that's not really a big deal, just come back later.
To expand slightly: I found Dark Souls 3 both more fun and more aesthetically pleasing than Dark Souls 2, so that's pretty much the whole of my recommendation.
...Also the bosses are way better in 3 than 2, especially in terms of how cool they are
2 was very good step in the right direction, but 3 is really where they got a lot of things right
Steam // Secret Satan
I am tempted to get First Sin since its the graphically overhauled version. Both are only $11.99 and come with the base game and all the DLC. The Dark Souls 1 version I played was the Prepare to Die Edition which I have been told was similarly slightly harder
Yes! Super fun, linear shooter with light, time power puzzles and satisfying weapons. Also you upgrade the sniper rifle to steerable bullets with the camera riding right behind the bullet which is amazing. (There is one short awful sewer level that must be endured before you go back to killing commies.) This one doesn't always go on sale, so $7.50 right now is a good pickup.
Also yes! CoJ; Gunslinger is just a fantastic, contained experience. A great shooter with a good story (and compelling narrator) and some light level ups/skill choosing. And it doesn't overstay its welcome at around 7-8 hours. (Again, there is one unfortunate level in a graveyard, but otherwise it's one fun set piece after another.)
Steam profile.
Getting started with BATTLETECH: Part 1 / Part 2
They're good games bucketmon
Time Ticks
I realize I'm a bit late, but https://steamcommunity.com/groups/goldeneye
Steam ID: Good Life
it was extremely smart of them to give your characters the ability to do cool shit without always needing mana potions
That's not to take anything away from 2, though. I've reinstalled that damn game more times than I'd care to admit over the years. And time played is probably second to the time I spent playing Everquest.
bnet: moss*1454
and comments on it
1 forced you into group fights pretty often as well
SotFS is much improved over base DS2 in my opinion, you're not missing anything by not playing the original.
the shift to focusing exclusively on sets being the only meaningful progression made every character samey as shit and stifled any sort of unique builds
D3 had a lot of problems at release and people like to pin it all on the rmah, but that was a symptom of design philosophy rather than the cause of it
and honestly, after they removed the rmah it really started blizzards increasing design philosophy across all their games of "fuck you you will play the game how we decide and also RNG is super fun"
D3 nailed combat flow and abilities/synergies way better than 2, but 3's item system has never been perfect and at worst, a complete debacle. Its progression curve is its greatest weakness
It's supposed to contrast with the shiny-happy sticker book you're making. The park with the people jogging is turned into a parking lot. The beach boardwalk is turned into a sand-covered wasteland.
I think it was a nice touch.
(Of course, I'd rather have a wallpaper of the sticker book art than the card art.)
they are very different games
If you found Dark Souls 1 frustrating, DS2 is pretty much more of the same but deeper.
DS3 is distinct from DS1 and 2 in a variety of subtle ways that may appeal to you
How exactly does removing the rmah necessitate/cause the homogenization of the builds (which I agree, is a bit stale)? I don't see the connection.
D3 build variety seems pretty good to me though? Depending on sets isn't a huge deal now that set and legendary items are a thing people can actually get
I'd like to see new sets and legendary options that opened up even more builds for sure but every class has multiple builds that are able to handle everything but extreme high level greater rifts
Though I also wanted them to make it so witch doctors could actually control their pets and then blizzard decided that controllable (ie useful) pets was suddenly core to the class identity of the necromancer in order to justify putting it in and that dream died